« On the lighter side, sort of | Main | The importance of counsel, and the challenges of judging it »

January 19, 2005

Booker internets resources and commentary

I have decided to use "internets," a term perhaps coined by President Bush, to describe collectively materials on traditional websites and on blogs.  And the internets have a lot to offer of late on the Booker front:



January 19, 2005 at 02:14 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Booker internets resources and commentary:


I confess. Do I get points for acceptance of responsibility under an advisory system of guidelines? I clearly cannot get credit for cooperation since few of my A. Non Emus predictions about Booker were accurate. You were - and are - a good sport. Thanks for devoting the time and thinking that makes your blog so interesting.

P.S. Also check out other federal defender circuit blogs, under the link "D-Web Law Blogs," such as defensenewsletter.blogspot.com. All circuits should be up and running soon.

P.P.S. Would you mind predicting that we'll never understand what a patently unreasonable sentence is - so we may someday devine the meaning of the last sentence of the Breyer majority decision.

Posted by: Paul Rashkind | Jan 19, 2005 2:25:15 PM

I respectfully argue you get the AOR points (two or three, depending upon the appropriate USSG Manual per Sec 1B1.11). It seems fundamental fairness arguments need this: the entire Guidelines analysis must happen as if Booker never dropped, or the advisory USSG calculation is flawed as a statutory sentencing factor under 18 USC 3553(a).

Fundamental fairness hopefully requires every defendant’s advisory USSG application to reflect exactly the sentencing range a Judge would have contemplated pre-Booker. That "old" calculation then gets mitigated in a full defense sentencing report, as now allowed.

Unless the appropriate USSG Manual is applied in full, including departure limitations, it seems the Court does not have a true USSG advisement with which to render a full 3553(a) analysis.

The "advisory" nature of the Guidelines comes not just from the two stricken subsections, but also from unlimited application of other sentencing statutes.

Posted by: Jay H | Jan 19, 2005 11:56:51 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB